[linux-dvb] Re: dvb-kernel CVS branched for Linux 2.4

[Jeremy Hall <jhall@maoz.com>]

If you can guarantee me that features and functionality worked on in 2.6 
that are reasonably 2.4 compliant will get ported to the 2.4 tree then I'm 
ok with it

but if you have features and bug fixes that are DVB related, but not 
architecture dependent, I.E. bootstrapping 2.6 stuff, then I have a real 
problem.  Maintaining two separate code trees without dilligence means 
that whomever is NOT on HEAD branch ultimately loses.

If the code before the split works both in 2.4 and 2.6, then why is that 
not satisfactory to include in mainline?

What were the historical reasons for using a single tree for 2.4 and 2.6? 
What has changed since then philisophically to cause that decision to be 
revoked without warning?

For many months, I thought dvb was for 2.4 and dvb-kernel was for 2.6.  I 
was surprised to see that dvb-kernel was also for 2.4 and gleefully 
switched to it.  I suspect people don't realize that dvb-kernel works in 
2.4.

Just because it isn't easy IMHO is not justification not to do it.  
Perhaps the CVS code could be marked up in some way such that when the 
code is exported to the kernel, an automated process could remove the 
unwanted segments I.E. 2.4 compatability.

_J

In the new year, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> Wolfgang Thiel wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 06:50:30PM +0200, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > > ...
> > > Consequently, I've created a "linux_2_4" branch in dvb-kernel CVS for
> > > the driver version for Linux 2.4.
> > > 
> > > Main development in CVS HEAD will be for Linux 2.6 only, and all 2.4
> > > compatibility stuff will soon be removed from HEAD.
> > >
> > I would love to switch to 2.6, but I cannot because of missing 2.6
> > drivers. I don't think I'm the only one...
> > For me, I don't have access to the internet with 2.6 because there
> > is no driver for AVM DSL SL USB available yet.
> > I don't like to be switched off from the main tree because of this.
> 
> IMHO creating a CVS branch is the appropriate tool to work on two
> parallel lines of development. It does not mean anyone is cut off from
> main development.
> 
> Also, I suspect that a good deal of work will be done on the
> 2.4 branch (not by me, of course :-), and will have to be forward
> ported...
> 
> 
> Johannes
> 
> 
> -- 
> Info:
> To unsubscribe send a mail to ecartis@linuxtv.org with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
> 



-- 
Info:
To unsubscribe send a mail to ecartis@linuxtv.org with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.